Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc.

S.D. Texas

Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc.

DecidedJune 21, 2022

Docket4:21-cv-02511

StatusUnknown

This text of Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc. (Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc., (S.D. Tex. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT June 21, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

SHAYLA ANDERSON and ROBERT § EDWARDS, § § Plaintiffs. § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:21-cv-02511 VS. § § SUNRIDGE MANAGEMENT § GROUP, INC., et al., § § Defendants. §

MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pending before me is Sunridge Management Group, Inc. and Grand Fountain Apts, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”). Dkt. 16. United States District Judge George C. Hanks, Jr. has referred the Motion to Dismiss to me for a report and recommendation. I have carefully analyzed the First Amended Complaint, the briefing submitted by both sides, and the applicable law. In reaching my decision, I am mindful that the Fifth Circuit has held that a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) is disfavored in the law and rarely granted. See Thompson v. Goetzmann, 337 F.3d 489, 495 (5th Cir. 2003). I am also required by a long line of cases to accept Plaintiffs’ well-pleaded facts as true and view them in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs. See Q Clothier New Orleans, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 29 F.4th 252, 256 (5th Cir. 2022). Given this legal authority, I recommend that the Motion to Dismiss be DENIED. To be clear, I am not saying Plaintiffs’ claims have merit. At this early juncture in the case, I am simply holding that the live pleading states cognizable claims for relief. After discovery takes place, we can assess at the summary judgment stage whether there is any factual basis for Plaintiffs’ claims or whether the claims should be dismissed as a matter of law. *** The Clerk shall provide copies of this Memorandum and Recommendation to the respective parties who have 14 days from the receipt to file written objections pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and General Order 2002–13. Failure to file written objections within the time period mentioned shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking the factual findings and legal conclusions on appeal. Signed on this 17th day of June 2022.

_____________________________ ANDREW M. EDISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT June 21, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

SHAYLA ANDERSON and ROBERT § EDWARDS, § § Plaintiffs. § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:21-cv-02511 VS. § § SUNRIDGE MANAGEMENT § GROUP, INC., et al., § § Defendants. §

MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pending before me is Sunridge Management Group, Inc. and Grand Fountain Apts, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”). Dkt. 16. United States District Judge George C. Hanks, Jr. has referred the Motion to Dismiss to me for a report and recommendation. I have carefully analyzed the First Amended Complaint, the briefing submitted by both sides, and the applicable law. In reaching my decision, I am mindful that the Fifth Circuit has held that a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) is disfavored in the law and rarely granted. See Thompson v. Goetzmann, 337 F.3d 489, 495 (5th Cir. 2003). I am also required by a long line of cases to accept Plaintiffs’ well-pleaded facts as true and view them in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs. See Q Clothier New Orleans, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 29 F.4th 252, 256 (5th Cir. 2022). Given this legal authority, I recommend that the Motion to Dismiss be DENIED. To be clear, I am not saying Plaintiffs’ claims have merit. At this early juncture in the case, I am simply holding that the live pleading states cognizable claims for relief. After discovery takes place, we can assess at the summary judgment stage whether there is any factual basis for Plaintiffs’ claims or whether the claims should be dismissed as a matter of law. *** The Clerk shall provide copies of this Memorandum and Recommendation to the respective parties who have 14 days from the receipt to file written objections pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and General Order 2002–13. Failure to file written objections within the time period mentioned shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking the factual findings and legal conclusions on appeal. Signed on this 17th day of June 2022.

_____________________________ ANDREW M. EDISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Anderson v. Sunridge Management Group, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-sunridge-management-group-inc-txsd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack